On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:32:01PM -0600, Ben Myers wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 03:00:11PM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > There is no fundamental need to keep an in-memory inode size copy in the XFS
> > inode. We already have the on-disk value in the dinode, and the separate
> > in-memory copy that we need for regular files only in the XFS inode.
> > Remove the xfs_inode i_size field and change the XFS_ISIZE macro to use the
> > VFS inode i_size field for regular fields. Switch code that was directly
I'll fix that up.
> > accessing the i_size field in the xfs_inode to XFS_ISIZE, or in cases where
> > we are limited to regular files direct access of the VFS inode i_size field.
> > This also allows dropping some fairly complicated code in the write path
> > which dealt with keeping the xfs_inode i_size uptodate with the VFS i_size
> > that is getting updated inside ->write_end.
> > Note that we do not bother resetting the VFS i_size when truncating a file
> > that gets freed to zero as there is point in doing so because the VFS inode
> > is no longer in use at this point. Just relax the assert in xfs_ifree to
> > only check the on-disk size instead.
> > Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> This looks good to me too. The only suggestion I had was that in some
> of these places where we call XFS_ISIZE or i_size_read twice in a row,
> it might be nicer to read them into a local variable and use that.
> Dave's comments were very helpful.
> Reviewed-by: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>